Message-ID: <5350A57A.1060509@freescale.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 12:09:30 +0800
From: Hongbo Zhang <hongbo.zhang@freescale.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
CC: <vkoul@infradead.org>, <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>, <scottwood@freescale.com>,
        <leo.li@freescale.com>, <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] DMA: Freescale: add fsl_dma_free_descriptor()
 to reduce code duplication
References: <1397113805-24171-1-git-send-email-hongbo.zhang@freescale.com>	 <1397113805-24171-5-git-send-email-hongbo.zhang@freescale.com>	 <1397129361.11914.96.camel@smile.fi.intel.com>	 <5347A46B.30206@freescale.com> <1397482830.11914.126.camel@smile.fi
In-Reply-To: <1397482830.11914.126.camel@smile.fi.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org


On 04/14/2014 09:40 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 16:14 +0800, Hongbo Zhang wrote:
>> On 04/10/2014 07:29 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2014-04-10 at 15:10 +0800, hongbo.zhang@freescale.com wrote:
> []
>
>>>> @@ -819,8 +826,7 @@ static void fsldma_cleanup_descriptor(struct fsldma_chan *chan,
>>>>    	dma_run_dependencies(txd);
>>>>    
>>>>    	dma_descriptor_unmap(txd);
>>>> -	chan_dbg(chan, "LD %p free\n", desc);
>>>> -	dma_pool_free(chan->desc_pool, desc, txd->phys);
>>>> +	fsl_dma_free_descriptor(chan, desc);
>>> Here is no list_del() call since it's been called in dma_do_tasklet().
>>> What will be the result of double list_del() against the same node?
>> Not clear with your point.
>> This patch is only introducing a common fsl_dma_free_descriptor() to
>> reduce code duplication. And later in the patch 6/8 the
>> fsldma_cleanup_descriptor() is replaced by fsldma_cleanup_descriptorS().
> In the last case you could have a broken kernel which will fails on
> double list_del(). I think it's better to leave this one untouched and
> you may remove it later.
>
> Or move this patch after you have removed that lines.
>

Good catch, thank you Andy.
Yes I prefer to leave this untouched and handle it later.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/